linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH net-next 1/2] bpf: enable non-root eBPF programs

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Mon, 5 Oct 2015 14:12:36 -0700
From:	Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...mgrid.com>
To:	Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
Cc:	"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
	Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
	Hannes Frederic Sowa <hannes@...essinduktion.org>,
	Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
	Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>,
	Linux API <linux-api@...r.kernel.org>,
	Network Development <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 1/2] bpf: enable non-root eBPF programs

On 10/5/15 2:00 PM, Kees Cook wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 5, 2015 at 1:48 PM, Alexei Starovoitov<ast@...mgrid.com>  wrote:
>> >In order to let unprivileged users load and execute eBPF programs
>> >teach verifier to prevent pointer leaks.
>> >Verifier will prevent
>> >- any arithmetic on pointers
>> >   (except R10+Imm which is used to compute stack addresses)
>> >- comparison of pointers
>> >- passing pointers to helper functions
>> >- indirectly passing pointers in stack to helper functions
>> >- returning pointer from bpf program
>> >- storing pointers into ctx or maps
> Does the arithmetic restriction include using a pointer as an index to
> a maps-based tail call? I'm still worried about pointer-based
> side-effects.

the array maps that hold FDs (BPF_MAP_TYPE_PROG_ARRAY and
BPF_MAP_TYPE_PERF_EVENT_ARRAY) don't have lookup/update accessors
from the program side, so programs cannot see or manipulate
those pointers.
For the former only bpf_tail_call() is allowed that takes integer
index and jumps to it. And the latter map accessed with
bpf_perf_event_read() that also takes index only (this helper
is not available to socket filters anyway).
Also bpf_tail_call() can only jump to the program of the same type.
So I'm quite certain it's safe.

Yes, please ask questions and try to poke holes. Now it is time.

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/